----- Original Message -----
From: "Ph. Wittenbergh" <jk7r-obt@asahi-net.or.jp>
To: "www-style List" <www-style@w3.org>
Cc: "Andrew Fedoniouk" <news@terrainformatica.com>
Sent: Sunday, November 08, 2009 10:36 PM
Subject: Re: [gradients] basics
>
> On Nov 9, 2009, at 3:24 PM, Andrew Fedoniouk wrote:
>
>> Ph. Wittenbergh wrote:
>>> On Nov 9, 2009, at 1:29 PM, Andrew Fedoniouk wrote:
>>>> background: linear-gradient(magenta yellow), url(...)
>>>>
>>>> has no visual effect but will force image to be downloaded.
>>>> Image at url(...) will be covered by linear gradient in full.
>>> background: linear-gradient(rgba(255,0,0,0.5), rgba(10,10,10,.25)),
>>> url(image.png);
>>
>> Why not
>>
>> background: url(image-with-that-gradient-on-top.png);
>>
>> ?
>>
>> This trick almost always requires knowledge about that
>> image on your side so why not just to produce that image
>> upfront?
>
> Because the image is a small repeating thing (a pattern for example)
> and I've no idea how much content will go in the box ?
>
> http://dev.l-c-n.com/CSS3_border-background/gradient3.html
> (requires a recent Minefield build, didn't try to write the code for
> WebKit)
This is a bit weak case I would say as:
Alpha-math theorem:
For any semi-transparent gradient on top of image there is always
such a combination of some gradient with semi-transparent image
on top of it that produce the same visual result.
Do I need to prove it or is it clear enough?
I strongly believe that benefit of having gradients and other synthetic
background color distibutions to be addressible independently from images
significantly overweights any multi-layer tricks that can be achieved.
Andrew Fedoniouk.
http://terrainformatica.com
>
> Philippe
> ---
> Philippe Wittenbergh
> http://l-c-n.com/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>